United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments

 

The Upper Tribunal

(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal number: IA/19545/2014

 

 

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

 

 

Heard at Manchester	Determination Promulgated
On December 11, 2014	On December 15, 2014

 

Before

 

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ALIS

 

 

Between

 

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT

Appellant

and

 

MR DESTINY IGHODEFEYI

(NO ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)

Respondent

 

 

Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr McVeety (Home Office Presenting Officer)

For the Respondent: Mr Atuegbe (Legal Representative)

 

 

DETERMINATION AND REASONS

1.             Whereas the original respondent is the appealing party, I shall, in the interests of convenience and consistency, replicate the nomenclature of the decision at first instance.

 

2.             The appellant, born September 5, 1982 is a citizen of Nigeria. On September 30, 2013 he submitted an application for limited leave to remain as the father of a British child and the partner of a British citizen. The respondent refused his application under the Immigration Rules on April 10, 2013 under Appendix FM and in particular sections R-LTRP or R-LTRPT.

 

3.             The appellant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal under Section 82(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 on April 23, 2014. On August 18, 2014 Judge of the First Tier Tribunal Foudy (hereinafter referred to as the “FtTJ”) heard his appeal. She allowed the appeal under Section EX.1 of Appendix FM based on the relationship with the child.

 

4.             The respondent lodged grounds of appeal on September 3, 2014 and on October 6, 2014 Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Vaudin d’Imecourt granted permission to appeal finding it arguable the FtTJ may have erred in light of the decision of Sabir (appendix FM-EX1 not freestanding) [2014] UKUT 63 (IAC).

 

5.             Mr McVeety accepted there was no merit to the grounds of appeal. The FtTJ correctly applied EX.1 in this appeal because the appellant was not caught by the provisions of Section E-LTRP.2.1 because he was an overstayer and not a visitor. He was therefore not excluded from the provisions and could rely on Section EX.1. There had, rightly or wrongly, been no challenge to the FtTJ’s findings at paragraphs [14] to [15] of her determination and he did not seek to persuade me to consider any additional grounds of appeal.

 

DECISION

 

6.             There was no material error of law I uphold the original decision.

 

7.             Under Rule 14(1) The Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (as amended) the appellant can be granted anonymity throughout these proceedings, unless and until a tribunal or court directs otherwise. No order has been made and no request for an order was submitted to me.

 

Signed: Dated: December 15, 2014

 

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Alis

 

 

 

TO THE RESPONDENT

 

There was no application for a fee award and I uphold the original fee award decision.

 

Signed: Dated: December 15, 2014

 

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Alis